I hope this happens soon

[big jay]

Originally Posted by tlapinski

Regarding slot limits, I have always been in favor of such limits so long as the sizes are purely based on scientific data and not random numbers. Protect the first two or three spawning opportunities, as well as the two most prolific spawning opportunities as based by scientific data, and/or allow for a trophy fish to be kept. This provides a fish for the table as well as a hunt for the next record fish. Limiting SB to only the small slot and no trophies will simply never happen as there is WAY too much money on the line for the big girls (tournaments, charters, tackle sales, endorsements, etc.).

That's a solid take on slot limits.

One of my biggest problems with Stripers Forever is that they continually advocate for a slot limit that targets pre-spawn fish.

How anyone can argue that killing fish that haven't even had the chance to spawn once is conservation, is asinine.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by big jay

That's a solid take on slot limits.

One of my biggest problems with Stripers Forever is that they continually advocate for a slot limit that targets pre-spawn fish.

How anyone can argue that killing fish that haven't even had the chance to spawn once is conservation, is asinine.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

We have different definitions of asinine.

The reasons are three fold (or four):
1. Larger fish have dramatically more eggs. One dead 40 incher is like killing three 28"ers.

2. When the slot is small, about 50% of the harvested fish are males.

3. A harvest that selects for bigger fish will result in smaller fish over time. It has been documented repeatedly in population studies.

4. (the weakest of the three) there is a portion of fisherman who only keep a fish because it is big and they want to show it to people, not because they want it for food. Some of those people aren't going to keep a 27"er since it is less likely to impress someone.

[JLH]

Originally Posted by zimmy

We have different definitions of asinine.

The reasons are three fold (or four):
1. Larger fish have dramatically more eggs. One dead 40 incher is like killing three 28"ers.

If you are concerned about the future of the fishery 3 28” fish have a lot more value than one 40” fish. The smaller fish will continue to grow and will spawn for many more years than a fish that is in the middle to end of its lifespan. The number of eggs the 3 smaller fish will contribute to the fishery over time is far greater than the one large fish. In my opinion the guys that are catching and releasing 30, 40 , 50+ schoolies are night are doing far more damage to the fishery than the guys that are out there hunting for big fish and keeping a handful of them a season.

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by JLH

If you are concerned about the future of the fishery 3 28” fish have a lot more value than one 40” fish. The smaller fish will continue to grow and will spawn for many more years than a fish that is in the middle to end of its lifespan. The number of eggs the 3 smaller fish will contribute to the fishery over time is far greater than the one large fish. In my opinion the guys that are catching and releasing 30, 40 , 50+ schoolies are night are doing far more damage to the fishery than the guys that are out there hunting for big fish and keeping a handful of them a season.

Do some studying on fisheries biology andand population dynamicsdynamics and see what you find. Let me know if you find data that supports your statement about smaller fish. I have never seen it. I have read a ton over the years.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[JLH]

Originally Posted by zimmy

Do some studying on fisheries biology andand population dynamicsdynamics and see what you find. Let me know if you find data that supports your statement about smaller fish. I have never seen it. I have read a ton over the years.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I have done a lot of reading on the subject. I'm not trying to argue that smaller fish produce more eggs than larger fish in any given year. If you look at their potential for producing eggs in coming years though the number of eggs the three smalle fish will/could produce far exceeds the potential for the one larger fish. If you want to ensure a healthy population going forward would you rather have a one 40" thats going to produce eggs for the next 5 years of 3 28" fish that are going to produce eggs in greater numbers each year as they grow in size for the next 15 years?

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by JLH

I have done a lot of reading on the subject. I'm not trying to argue that smaller fish produce more eggs than larger fish in any given year. If you look at their potential for producing eggs in coming years though the number of eggs the three smalle fish will/could produce far exceeds the potential for the one larger fish. If you want to ensure a healthy population going forward would you rather have a one 40" thats going to produce eggs for the next 5 years of 3 28" fish that are going to produce eggs in greater numbers each year as they grow in size for the next 15 years?

If you could point me to any of those studies, I would appreciate. I would like to at least see a discussion of the math. The potential of the small fish you speak of is irrelevant once those fish can be harvested at 28 or 36". The drums lot that targets the 18-27" allows for maximum recruitment and increases growth rates within the slot due to lower competition,which results in more and bigger fish. It may not be intuitive, but it is in practice, supported by the science, and it works.

[JLH]

Originally Posted by zimmy

If you could point me to any of those studies, I would appreciate. I would like to at least see a discussion of the math. The potential of the small fish you speak of is irrelevant once those fish can be harvested at 28 or 36". The drums lot that targets the 18-27" allows for maximum recruitment and increases growth rates within the slot due to lower competition,which results in more and bigger fish. It may not be intuitive, but it is in practice, supported by the science, and it works.

Originally Posted by zimmy

If you could point me to any of those studies, I would appreciate. I would like to at least see a discussion of the math. The potential of the small fish you speak of is irrelevant once those fish can be harvested at 28 or 36". The drums lot that targets the 18-27" allows for maximum recruitment and increases growth rates within the slot due to lower competition,which results in more and bigger fish. It may not be intuitive, but it is in practice, supported by the science, and it works.

You originally stated that killing one 40" fish was the same as killing three 28" fish. Starting from now and going forward assuming all fish reach the same age (say 20 years) the eggs produced by the three fish will far exceed the eggs produced by the one. The smaller fish are going to grow and produce more eggs and the larger fish going to die off first.

A slot limit may be the answer, or maybe not. My only point was that mathematically you are likely get a greater return over time with the three smaller fish.




Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[l.i.fish.in.vt]

Nebe,the seals are not a problem along the inside of the cape,at least not until you get to long point.

[Nebe]

Originally Posted by l.i.fish.in.vt

Nebe,the seals are not a problem along the inside of the cape,at least not until you get to long point.

Makes sense.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[MAKAI]

Originally Posted by Nebe

Makes sense.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Soon though. Had some pop up in front of me shore fishing last spring on the inside last year. God I hate those fn things.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[big jay]

Originally Posted by zimmy

We have different definitions of asinine.

The reasons are three fold (or four):
1. Larger fish have dramatically more eggs. One dead 40 incher is like killing three 28"ers.

2. When the slot is small, about 50% of the harvested fish are males.

3. A harvest that selects for bigger fish will result in smaller fish over time. It has been documented repeatedly in population studies.

4. (the weakest of the three) there is a portion of fisherman who only keep a fish because it is big and they want to show it to people, not because they want it for food. Some of those people aren't going to keep a 27"er since it is less likely to impress someone.

I'll give you 2 and 3 as reasonable points, but point #1 illustrates the ineffectiveness of SF's proposal.

Not only do they want to take pre-spawn fish, but their plan also includes taking +40" breeders.

The other problem is that a group of experienced fisherman often forget is that most people out there struggle to catch a "keeper" bass. But alot of these of these guys can get a schoolie or 3 - drop the size to 20" and mortality goes through the roof as all these people can now catch and kill a "keeper bass".

Look at what happened in Maine when they went with their slot - mortality skyrocketed, and their fishing went in the toilet.

I don't want to see a plan that failed miserably in 1 state get rolled out to all of New England and wreck everyone's fishing.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device